Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Destiny


2017 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction148 1 1 1 3 4 6 17 31 50 34 87.328
ILS Functionality147 1 1 3 2 6 5 24 24 55 26 87.138
Print Functionality146 1 1 5 1 13 25 46 54 97.778
Electronic Functionality144 6 2 3 4 9 18 23 28 28 23 76.337
Company Satisfaction147 3 1 6 4 12 31 47 43 87.528
Support Satisfaction144 2 1 3 6 11 32 38 51 97.658
Support Improvement137 2 2 15 47 11 17 16 27 56.246
Company Loyalty140 4 2 2 3 8 10 5 23 35 48 97.148
Open Source Interest139 57 18 17 9 12 9 4 6 4 3 02.141

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS148 96.08%
Considering new Interface148 42.70%
System Installed on time?148 13591.22%

Average Collection size: 34411

TypeCount
Public12
Academic8
School54
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00024
[2] 10,001-100,000107
[3] 100,001-250,0002
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction611 1 5 7 2 14 26 45 137 200 174 87.548
ILS Functionality602 3 11 5 13 29 58 119 211 153 87.458
Print Functionality609 3 6 15 17 26 92 215 235 97.898
Electronic Functionality574 9 8 7 18 31 69 75 105 123 129 96.757
Company Satisfaction610 2 1 3 9 18 26 43 110 200 198 87.628
Support Satisfaction594 6 4 6 9 22 28 32 92 164 231 97.578
Support Improvement573 7 2 5 6 57 149 49 68 104 126 56.537
Company Loyalty590 20 7 8 4 30 42 37 73 150 219 97.248
Open Source Interest568 216 57 54 36 78 61 26 13 14 13 02.402

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS621 213.38%
Considering new Interface621 254.03%
System Installed on time?621 56290.50%

Average Collection size: 44857

TypeCount
Public61
Academic8
School539
Consortium1
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,000118
[2] 10,001-100,000360
[3] 100,001-250,0007
[4] 250,001-1,000,0006
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0004
[6] over 10,000,0010


Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2015 results according to the type and size of the library.

DestinyallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1317.37 400446.9300807.631
ILSFunctionality1317.28 400446.7300807.601
PrintFunctionality1297.62 400436.7900798.111
ElectronicFunctionality1246.11 400425.9800756.231
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1297.50 400437.3500797.571
CompanyLoyalty1267.10 400436.5800767.421



2015 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction131 3 5 8 17 24 40 34 87.378
ILS Functionality131 2 5 10 17 28 39 30 87.288
Print Functionality129 1 4 11 6 27 33 47 97.628
Electronic Functionality124 2 1 7 9 8 18 16 28 13 22 76.117
Company Satisfaction129 1 4 7 13 31 39 34 87.498
Support Satisfaction129 3 10 2 13 23 33 45 97.508
Support Improvement118 4 2 3 8 33 9 21 12 26 56.287
Company Loyalty126 4 4 2 6 11 8 18 25 48 97.108
Open Source Interest123 59 9 16 3 17 7 4 4 3 1 01.931

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS137 107.30%
Considering new Interface137 53.65%
System Installed on time?137 12188.32%

Average Collection size: 183623

TypeCount
Public45
Academic4
School84
Consortium1
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00015
[2] 10,001-100,00098
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0004
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0005
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction120 4 6 3 5 9 23 41 29 87.228
ILS Functionality120 2 5 3 5 2 8 24 42 29 87.208
Print Functionality120 1 1 2 2 4 8 19 43 40 87.638
Electronic Functionality115 8 3 1 4 5 14 15 25 28 12 86.127
Company Satisfaction119 1 1 4 1 2 5 9 20 39 37 87.438
Support Satisfaction118 1 1 3 2 3 8 7 18 31 44 97.438
Support Improvement113 2 4 3 10 41 8 13 11 21 56.005
Company Loyalty117 5 6 1 1 6 9 5 16 22 46 96.948
Open Source Interest112 48 15 12 3 13 11 1 2 4 3 02.091

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS122 1310.66%
Considering new Interface122 54.10%
System Installed on time?122 11392.62%

Average Collection size: 155840

TypeCount
Public33
Academic4
School81
Consortium2
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00019
[2] 10,001-100,00080
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0004
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction363 1 2 13 30 80 133 104 87.758
ILS Functionality363 1 3 1 4 15 22 93 139 85 87.608
Print Functionality362 1 2 6 13 58 120 162 98.138
Electronic Functionality333 6 6 7 9 42 49 83 79 52 76.777
Company Satisfaction362 1 3 3 4 8 18 67 133 125 87.848
Support Satisfaction360 1 2 4 3 3 15 21 61 101 149 97.808
Support Improvement346 5 4 2 3 12 121 25 36 71 67 56.487
Company Loyalty355 8 3 1 2 4 19 18 48 89 163 97.738
Open Source Interest346 154 33 28 20 25 60 13 5 4 4 02.111

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS368 51.36%
Considering new Interface368 41.09%
System Installed on time?368 33791.58%

Average Collection size: 37635

TypeCount
Public26
Academic2
School335
Consortium2
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00061
[2] 10,001-100,000248
[3] 100,001-250,0002
[4] 250,001-1,000,0006
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0002
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction48 1 2 4 6 11 16 8 87.178
ILS Functionality47 1 1 3 2 3 4 15 14 4 76.627
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction48 2 2 2 10 20 12 87.678
Support Satisfaction48 1 2 1 7 17 20 98.028
Support Improvement46 1 14 3 10 12 6 56.787
Company Loyalty48 1 2 3 1 3 4 3 6 8 17 96.678
Open Source Interest48 18 6 7 3 6 3 2 1 2 02.192

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS49 816.33%
Considering new Interface49 36.12%
System Installed on time?49 4693.88%

Average Collection size: 60496

TypeCount
Public36
Academic3
School10
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00040
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction37 1 1 2 1 5 10 8 9 76.977
ILS Functionality36 1 1 1 1 3 6 12 5 6 76.647
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction37 1 3 6 10 8 9 77.247
Support Satisfaction37 1 1 1 2 5 5 12 10 87.248
Support Improvement35 1 1 2 14 2 4 4 7 56.175
Company Loyalty37 3 2 2 3 3 9 4 11 96.467
Open Source Interest37 7 6 7 5 1 3 1 3 1 3 03.142

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS37 513.51%
Considering new Interface37 25.41%
System Installed on time?37 3491.89%

Average Collection size: 74155

TypeCount
Public22
Academic1
School14
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00025
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2010 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction23 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 12 2 86.658
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction23 1 3 1 2 6 6 4 76.357
Support Satisfaction23 1 1 1 2 1 1 5 8 3 86.577
Support Improvement23 2 2 1 7 1 1 6 3 55.965
Company Loyalty23 3 1 1 1 2 3 8 4 86.098
Open Source Interest23 6 5 3 1 1 3 1 3 03.042

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS23 28.70%
Considering new Interface23 14.35%
System Installed on time?23 2295.65%

Average Collection size: 20091

TypeCount
Public15
Academic0
School8
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00018
[3] 100,001-250,0000
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2009 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction15 1 1 1 3 6 3 87.208
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction15 1 1 1 2 5 5 87.408
Support Satisfaction15 1 1 2 6 5 87.538
Support Improvement14 1 1 5 3 4 56.218
Company Loyalty15 2 5 3 5 76.938
Open Source Interest15 7 1 3 1 2 1 02.531

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS15 213.33%
Considering new Interface15 00.00%
System Installed on time?15 1493.33%





2008 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction8 1 1 2 3 1 87.138
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction8 1 3 4 98.259
Support Satisfaction8 1 1 1 4 1 87.388
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty8 1 1 1 2 3 97.258
Open Source Interest7 1 2 1 1 2 24.144

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS8 112.50%
Considering new Interface8 112.50%
System Installed on time?8 787.50%





2007 Survey Results
Product: Destiny Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction7 3 4 87.148
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction10 1 2 1 4 2 87.208
Support Satisfaction10 1 1 2 3 3 87.108
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty10 3 1 2 1 3 57.007
Open Source Interest10 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 04.105

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS10 220.00%
Considering new Interface10 110.00%
System Installed on time?10 110.00%




2017 : gen: 7.32 company 7.52 loyalty 7.14 support 7.65

2016 : gen: 7.54 company 7.62 loyalty 7.24 support 7.57

2015 : gen: 7.37 company 7.49 loyalty 7.10 support 7.50

2014 : gen: 7.22 company 7.43 loyalty 6.94 support 7.43

2013 : gen: 7.75 company 7.84 loyalty 7.73 support 7.80

2012 : gen: 7.17 company 7.67 loyalty 6.67 support 8.02

2011 : gen: 6.97 company 7.24 loyalty 6.46 support 7.24

2010 : gen: 6.65 company 6.35 loyalty 6.09 support 6.57

2009 : gen: 7.20 company 7.40 loyalty 6.93 support 7.53

2008 : gen: 7.13 company 8.25 loyalty 7.25 support 7.38

2007 : gen: 7.14 company 7.20 loyalty 7.00 support 7.10

Comments

We quit using ProQuest's Summon Discovery because our IT department does not support Proxy Servers and we could not get their 360 Link Resolver to work without one. We can not afford an ILS system bigger than those at the level of Follett's Destiny Program. As much as we would like to upgrade to a Sirsi Dynix type system more appropriate for a small academic institution we can not afford one at this time. (Type: Academic)

We use Destiny from Follett. This product has far more features than we are able to implement due to lack of staff and time to implement. We are very happy with Destiny. (Type: School)

I HATE open source ILS. It doesn't work for me. We had it as part of a consortium and I left the consortium because of the open source ILS. As a school library with only one library and a staff of 1 - using an open source program without support was terrible. I was so frustrated. I tried to get help from the public library, but they "didn't have time". They wanted my money to help pay for Evergreen, but wouldn't help me when I needed it. It also wasn't really kid-friendly. Being a school, I needed a ILS that students could navigate a little easier. I've been happy with Follett. (Type: School)

This is a county wide school library consortium with 35 individual partners. the above number does bot include digital materials (Type: School)

It would be much easier to use the Destiny system if it were geared more toward a public library setting, as opposed to a school scenario. It is difficult to impossible to get all the info for our Annual Report by using the report generator with this system. (Type: Public)

We are unhappy with Follett's proprietary nature, which makes it impossible for us to take advantage of, for instance, Ebsco Novelist K-8's ability to be embedded in the online catalog. We are dissatisfied with the lack of local control over the public display of catalog information in Destiny, and the fact that Follett's priorities do not align with our library's priorities. Follett have been responsive insofar as we have had email communication with them about our needs, but so far no actual results have been seen. We are dissatisfied with the level of cataloging expertise shown by Follett customer service: questions about cataloging almost never receive usable responses. Re Bywater: we have been extremely impressed by their responsiveness, especially its timeliness, and we are in discussion with them re migrating to Koha. We will go ahead if the customization possibilities for the Koha interface align with the needs of our library and our students. (Type: School)

Some aspects of Destiny reporting is more geared towards public libraries and not towards school libraries. (Type: School)

[...] (Type: School)

When we upgrated to Destiny, we had more issues and in a lot of areas, it was more difficult to operate with more frequent errors. (Type: Public)

We have submitted suggestions to Follett for improvements and new features in Destiny, but there is never any follow up to acknowledge submissions. For the most part Destiny meets our needs. (Type: Public)

We have just installed Destiny in the last three months so unable to make comprehensive assessment of the system! (Type: Special)

There are still glitches in the system that do not seem to get resolved. It is horrible at finding specific items in the general catalogue tab. Support does not always know what they need to know. At one time my technician was more knowledgeable than the support staff we were trying to work with. (Type: Public)

Our library is looking into a better fit for a public library as compared with Follett which seems to be geared more toward school libraries. (Type: Public)

The Destiny Library Manager System is a workable solution for school libraries but other library types should consider other vendors/products. (Type: School)

Good basic system. Serves our current needs. No on campus tech infrastructure for Open Source system or support. (Type: Academic)

When our school first moved to automation we used winnebago. We then went with the open-source program Evergreen. Being a library with a staff of one person, using Evergreen was extremely difficult. There was no support and the software difficult to manage. Uploading marc records, searching, everything about it was frustrating for me and the students of our school. Saving money and time was a big incentive to move our circulation to Follett Destiny. Overall, I am happy with the migration. (Type: School)

We have been generally pleased with the union version of Destiny Library and Textbook Manager. The two most significant detractions to implementation is the a) software costs, both initial and annual service fee and b) lack of user friendly training opportunities for both counter staff and student patrons (built-in discovery interface). ILS-specific user forums would be great, especially if they can be regionalized/localized. The promotion of normalizing student access to the ILS from home and the class room would promote greater book checkout. This is should in concert with promoting other information databases to be accessed from home, such as subscription based data access; Discovery Education, SIRS, etc. (Type: School)

I love Follett; lots of options already built-in, fairly good response when they get suggestions (2/year updates). We're hosted by them, so we get the updates right away (compared to being two versions back when we were hosted by the district). Great community of users as well, who help each other with issues. (Type: School)

[...] (Type: School)

I am happy with Follett Destiny. The only thing I wish I could do is print a report for labels that would allow me to print a batch of barcodes (not sequential) on a page of labels at one time. (Type: School)

[...] (Type: Public)

WE switched from Koha supported by ByWaters Solutions for Follett Destiny because we had a switch in people running out department. There were new people in the department that had worked with Destiny in the past that said they were unable to have Koha do what they were used to Destiny being able to do. We also had our in-house open source person leave the district and there was no one else that could do the things he could do. Follett made the District an offer they couldn't refuse. We'll be paying for it in the future but it was easy for them to do at the time. I have not been impressed with Folletts customer support as we are still having barcodes read incorrectly or not at all. The other librarians are happy with Follett and the district is looking at adding asset manager to our contract to help manage the ipads we have. (Type: School)

I run a consortium. (Type: Consortium)

I have used this software before Follett bought it and have used it since 1983 and went through Apple IIE, DOS, 3.1 to the online version now. Have always had good tech support from them. (Type: Public)

I am the new librarian and trying to work things out on my own. Perhaps I should contact you with the relatively few questions I do have. (Type: Public)

Product is satisfactory. Price appropriate for our budget. Some staff have objections about the functionality. (Type: Academic)

Current implementation covers library, textbooks, and assets. Each are provided as separate modules and the features (access, programming, customization, etc.) varies from module to module. This creates a learning curve when moving from one module to the next. For example, adding a field in one module is not possible in another. (Type: School)

Our current version of Destiny is about 5 years old, so we are considering updating to a newer version. It is possible a newer version will offer the options we are now requiring for better usability and information gathering. (Type: Public)

Customer Service has been unable to give me correct information when I have inquired about issues in the system. (Type: School)

At this time we have frustrations with Destiny because it is limited in the "custom reports" that can be created. There are many limitations in the "Reports" section. Truly "custom reports" would allow key filters or search terms to be chosen by the user. We are in a large school system that rarely changes software. I do not foresee our district changing to a discovery interface or an open source ILS. We have twenty sites with an approximate total collection of 400,000 items. Both of these options would be very helpful. (Type: School)

The survey is listed for the district...we have 34 schools. I really only can answer for my school (Type: School)

We are very pleased with our vendor -Follett as they provide excellent support and have kept up with changing technology adding apps etc. The open source systems we have seen look quite outdated, and have little interest in going back in time. (Type: Public)

We have chosen to manage our print materials through Destiny and our ebooks through MackinVIA. Destiny is still our main catalog, but it would be interesting to see how many school libraries (or public libraries) are using multiple systems to manage multiple media types. (Type: School)

Our library books are through San[...] which uses polaris (Type: School)

ILS